A STATE OF INSECURITY — THE INCARCERATION OF HON. GIVEN LUBINDA
BY HON. LUCKY MULUSA
It is extremely painful to see how state organs are abusing citizens each time there is a difference of opinion between and among citizens on the one hand, and the State on the other.
In the end, we have a situation where those elected to govern, have, in under 20 short months after taking power, descended into a worrisome state of insecurity. We now have a state of insecurity in the place of democracy underpinned by the 2.8 million votes. This figure one would have thought gave the UPND government unfettered legitimacy for people to be repaid through good governance practices.
In all this, only the gullible would be fooled that the current government is acting within the law each time they arrest an opposition leader. To the contrary, what is at play is LAWFARE, the use or abuse of legally established organs of the state to inconvenience citizens who hold different views from those in power. This is a clear dawn of the most sustained crackdown on dissent, only comparable to the authoritarian one party state of the UNIP era. It is not surprising in response to the visit by the Communist Party of China, the UPND said they wish to learn on how the UPND can institutionalize the party just as it is institutionalized in China! Are we going back to the One Party State of UNIP days? Then the Director of Information at the ministry of Information, my good brother Thabo Kawana responds to to political activism of the opposition PF that, “If we here you, telling lies we will come for you!” How can a the civil service go for political issues?
The executive through the police brutalize, maim and take away peoples’ lives at will. The police are used to deny people the freedom of speech, movement and association and fair participation in elections. Elections are a cardinal conduit for peoples’ participation in governance and politics being the activityby which groups reach binding collective decisions through attempting to reconcile differences among their members is health in our contemporary democracy. Politics must presume an initial diversity of views about goals or means or both. It is said that, were we always in agreement all the time, politics would be redundant. Politics involves reconciling such differences through discussion and persuasion and not weaponising state institutions against dissenting citizens.
The Judiciary seems to have an insatiable appetite to take away peoples’ liberties at will, deny people justice, or take away their hard earned wealth through incompetent or corrupt rulings. By her own admission, Justice Chibesakunda as Acting Chief Justice, told the nation that the judiciary was corrupt. And indeed we have seen in the recent past the dismissal of a number of judges and other officials from the judiciary.
The legislature is another institution involved in double standard practices against citizens simply for pointing out bad practices. It is like politics is a plague in this country and for as long as someone who is practicing it is not in government, then they are a pariah to the state and must be dealt with brutally! Did given Lubinda deserve to spend time in police custody for the perceived misdemeanor for which Parliament did not complain against? Cry my beloved country and HELL NO!
It is embarrassingly bizarre, that Parliament, the very bastion of our democracy, must itself lead in the campaign to gag citizens in the most draconian manner one can ever imagine in a democratic society.
How can verbal differences between an opposition leader and Parliament turn into criminal defamation for which an alleged offender must face criminal sanctions?
Let us not forget that in 2012, I chaired Mr. Speaker’s Select Committee that considered the ratification of Mr. Mutembo Nchito as DPP. Following his ratification, I was concerned with his actions that led me to write to Mr. Nchito, President Sata, the Attorney General and the ACC Director general as follows and I quote:
“I have perused through Cap 12 of the Laws of Zambia and come to the following clauses that are critical to the Mutembo Nchito case:
WITNESSES PROTECTION AND PROSECUTION
PART II
(False evidence)
16. Any person who before the Assembly or any authorised committee intentionally gives a false answer to any question material to the subject of inquiry which may be put to him during the course of any examination shall be guilty of an offence against section one hundred and four of the Penal Code.
In this case, I wrote, Mr Mutembo Nchito gave a false answer to the Committee which had shared concerns with him that given that it was the PF government’s wish that Mr Banda’s immunity be lifted, Mr Mutembo Nchito’s assertion that Mr Banda targeted him and that the downfall of Zambian Airways, a company so dear to his heart, was a consequence of that targeting, would compromise his position.
It was also pointed out to him that the prosecution of Dr Mathani, whose bank he was indebted to, was awaiting the new DPP’s instructions. Mr Mutembo Nchito allayed these fears by stating that he would not personally prosecute Mr Banda and that he would declare interest in any matters involving Dr Rajan Mathani.
He however went on to enter two nolle prosequi in favour of Dr Rajan Mathani who in turn discontinued claims against him for the money owed to Finance Bank. Dr Mathani was caused to commit possible corporate fraud when he illegally used company proceeds to pay for his sins.
He also evaded tax payments as a result of lost interest income from which the public should have earned tax. Dr Mathani committed corporate fraud and frustrated ZRA’a ability to collect tax from the bank’s transactions.
By stating the above highlighted falsehoods, Mr Mutembo Nchito was in breach of Section 16 of Cap 12 of the Laws of Zambia which is an offence under section one hundred and four of the Penal Code.
Following the above-mentioned letter, I further sought guidance from the Speaker on how I needed to proceed if Mr. Nchito failed to exculpate himself. I was ignored and rumor had it that I was going to be suspended from Parliament for expressing concerns bordering on public interest. My seat was later nullified.
Parliament never responded nor acted on my observation.
A short while letter Mr. Hichilema as an opposition leader was about to be summoned by Parliament to go and be sanctioned for comments Mr. Speaker was not pleased with. I wrote to the Speaker reminding him of more serious criminal acts regarding Mr. Nchito, which the Speaker ignored. He abandoned the planned action against HH:- What an act of institutional arrogance and insincerity!
Fast forward, Hon. Lubinda was incarcerated for apparently ignoring Parliament summons. But then, this is the same Parliament that ignores people when they seek redress from the Institution – double standards!
Recently, I wrote to the Speaker asking her to operationalize the Office of the Public Protector. Nothing has happened, not even an acknowledgement of receipt of the request.
When the citizens proposed to have that Office in the constitution they enacted for themselves, nobody has the right to ignore them especially those that swear to uphold it. Maladministration, which that Office is supposed to deal with, has continued unabated by the UPND government at great cost to the nation’s development agenda. Cry my beloved country!